As it should be. 

When Sendak wrote "Where The Wild Things Are", more than 50 years ago, it was either derided as too dark for children, or hailed as an incredible opportunity for its readers to unleash their "collective imagination."

And now, for sure, the collective imagination of its readers has been unleashed with Spike Jonze's interpretation of Sendak's classic.

And, it's the interpretations of the interpretations that I find fascinating.

Let's see. David Brooks of the New York TImes has a go with the concept of psychology and philosophy as the competing forces in shaping Max's behavior. The Call of the Wild Things by Charles McNair gives us an in depth analysis, questioning… is it the illustration, the story, or something else? Hint, it's something else. The Huffington Posts Jonathan Kim questions the rift between those who thought the film was ill conceived and misguided (yikes) and those who thought it charming and delightful (fuzzy and warm?)

For the record, I thought the film was ____________and will be continuing my interpretations on the interpretations around Oscar time.

If you have a comment on the comments of the interpretations of interpretors here is your chance to weigh in.